Eagle, I don't want to form an alliance anymore.

"The abolition of the death penalty is for civilized countries," an old worker muttered nearby, without indicating whether he was being sarcastic or serious.

The judge then added that the sentencing basis was as follows: According to the "Criminal Law on the Abuse of Unexplained Wealth," embezzlement of more than three million rubles is punishable by death, while embezzlement between one million and three million rubles is punishable by life imprisonment and labor reform, and those with particularly egregious circumstances may also be sentenced to death.

The party and government officials who were invited to observe the proceedings in the front row of the stadium did not look well, especially when the judge read out the sentencing standards, several of them turned pale.

Some people lowered their heads and stopped looking at the screen, staring at their hands, hands that might have signed documents they shouldn't have.

The judge then declared that the defendant had the right to appeal to a higher court within ten days.

The trial has ended.

After the public trial, a commentator appeared on the legal channel. A young announcer spoke in a passionate and positive tone:

"Public trial rallies can play their role in educating the masses—making the masses unafraid of officials, daring to say no to injustice and corruption, and daring to exercise their right to democratic supervision. The Soviet Union's rule of law was designed to make every citizen know that everyone is equal before the law."

In addition to the public trial, the legal channel also broadcast other content.

Many corrupt officials whose crimes did not warrant the death penalty were sentenced to labor reform. The legal channel followed and filmed the actual situation of these labor reforms, with the camera following these former officials as they entered the labor camps.

The labor camps were not the horrific scenes imagined by the West—there were no barbed wire fences, no guard towers, and no skeleton-like prisoners in striped prison uniforms. They looked like ordinary work camps, with dormitories, canteens, and work areas.

Working eight hours a day, some were building railways, laying tracks in Siberia; others were planting potatoes—the Soviet labor camps in Siberia weren't really worried about escapes, since the surrounding hundreds of kilometers of uninhabited land meant people couldn't go very far without a vehicle, and much of the supplies had to be brought in by helicopter; still others were planting trees, the Soviet Union was restoring the ecosystem around the Aral Sea...

The commentator said, "This is to make corrupt officials who have embezzled the people's hard-earned money deeply understand the lives of the vast working people. We use labor to reform their thinking, letting them know that every penny they have embezzled was earned by the sweat and toil of the working people!"

The legal channel also broadcast other content related to the development of the rule of law in the Soviet Union: legal education, grassroots legal aid, and community legal consultation.

What impressed French viewers most was a scene where Soviet judges formed a circuit court in a small minority community of only tens of thousands of people in the far north of Siberia.

A young judge, dressed in a thick cotton-padded coat, wearing a leather hat, and carrying the Soviet party emblem, rode a stocky Siberian horse across the snow-covered wilderness. A leather bag containing legal documents and codes hung from his saddle. He was heading to a remote Nenets pastoral camp, where dozens of tents were scattered across the tundra.

He set up a table in the largest tent, hung a Soviet flag and coat of arms, and began to explain the law to the herders.

The herders sat around the stove, listening to the young man speak in Russian, which they could barely understand, about "what your rights are," "what you can do if someone violates your rights," and "how Soviet law protects you."

When the image of the young judge riding a horse across the Siberian tundra to teach the law to herders was broadcast on French television, many people were moved.

The image of a socialist country attempting to bring the rule of law to the most remote corners has a simple yet powerful appeal.

...

The French government reacted swiftly. In the summer of 1994, the right-wing-dominated parliament passed a law prohibiting French citizens from privately setting up satellite dishes to receive television signals from the Soviet Union and the Warsaw Pact.

The reason given was to prevent foreign ideological propaganda from interfering with French public opinion. At the same time, Parliament also banned the sale in France of Soviet-exported satellite receiving equipment—those extremely inexpensive small dish antennas specifically optimized for receiving Soviet television signals.

The ban immediately drew criticism domestically.

"Is France following Britain's example and doing 1984?" asked Libération, a major left-wing newspaper in France, on its front page.

"In a country that touts freedom of speech, how is it any different for the government to tell its citizens they can't watch a certain TV channel? This is no different from the totalitarian countries we criticize."

The protests from French intellectuals were substantial, and as a compromise, the French government relaxed restrictions on French citizens traveling to Warsaw Pact countries. Previously, French citizens had to go through a cumbersome visa approval process to travel to the Soviet Union; now, the process has been simplified, and visas can be obtained in just a few days.

Of course, this is just a superficial simplification; in reality, visas may still be denied for various strange reasons.

Moscow took note of these changes in France. Slava conveyed instructions to the French Communist Party through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and the KGB: to deepen ties with Moscow and take advantage of France's relaxation of travel restrictions to organize visits and study tours for French Communist Party cadres and allies to the Soviet Union.

Meanwhile, Moscow provided intelligence support to the French Communist Party establishment. Moscow wanted those reformists who had received funding from the West removed from the leadership; the CIA's development of influence agents within European communist parties was standard practice for decades during the Cold War, and the French Communist Party was no exception.

Based on intelligence provided by Moscow, the French Communist Party establishment disciplined several key figures of the reformists on the grounds of unexplained wealth. This was inspired by the Soviet Union's anti-corruption reforms, and the French Communist Party also implemented a similar asset declaration system internally.

Several individuals were indeed corrupt, their personal wealth far exceeding what could be explained by the salary of a French Communist Party cadre; several individuals were indeed CIA informants, maintaining regular contact with the cultural attaché at the US Embassy in Paris (a common cover identity for the CIA) and receiving research grants (a common funding channel for the CIA).

However, some people simply chose the wrong side in the power struggle. The French Communist Party's internal purges were far less extensive than those in the Soviet Union, but they still raised similar questions: under the guise of anti-corruption, how much of it was genuine anti-corruption, and how much was merely a pretext to attack dissidents?

Robert Hue watched as his allies were punished one by one, some expelled from the party, others stripped of their party positions, and his face grew increasingly grim.

He maintains his view that the essence of the Soviet-style communist system is periodic purges. Moscow purges its own cadres and then teaches communist parties around the world to do the same.

In May 1994, the 5th Congress of the French Communist Party began.

Robert Hughes abandoned his proposal to formally abandon democratic centralism at the congress. He knew that under the current circumstances, the reformists of the French Communist Party had little chance of making any waves. Many reformist cadres had changed their minds after contacting the Soviet Union and believed that the French Communist Party's current path of not abandoning class struggle was correct. They believed that a coalition government would only corrupt the Communist Party, and that if the French Communist Party wanted to gain more votes, it should try to attract the base of other parties!

More importantly, Moscow provided some financial assistance to the French Communist Party (CCP), and some of the industries operated by the CCP had close ties with the Soviet Union. At the same time, Moscow suggested that the CCP manage its core controlled areas well and introduce the Soviet experience in information technology reform as a pilot project.

Finally, the congress came to a close. Several staff members came to Robert's side and led him out of the venue. Afterwards, the French Communist Party announced that Robert had to leave the venue temporarily due to illness. A few days later, seeing that the reformist faction of the French Communist Party had lost its momentum, Robert announced his resignation from the party and joined the Socialist Party.

Even more dramatic events followed. After its 28th Congress, the French Communist Party (CCP) began to contact the Socialist Party and launched a propaganda campaign to recruit a large number of disheartened Socialist Party members to the CCP to receive the "modern socialism of the new era" education.

"Hey, comrade, could I have a few minutes? I'd like to explain our policies and strategies to you..."

The Socialist Party naturally doesn't want its members to be snatched away by the French Communist Party. Even a weakened camel is bigger than a horse. The French Communist Party's support rate is 16%, while the Socialist Party's support rate, even if it suffers a crushing defeat, is still 23%. With the help of smaller parties like the Green Party, they can still crush the French Communist Party!

Moscow believes that since the left suffered a crushing defeat in the 1993 National Assembly elections and the right wing gained control of parliament, even if the French Communist Party miraculously defeats the Socialist Party's Jospin and the Rally for the Republic's Chirac, it will still face a situation of being checked and balanced by the right wing.

Instead of allowing the Communist Party to simply showcase its image and garner votes, the French Communist Party should seize this opportunity to become the largest opposition party, ideally defeating the Socialist Party. However, the Socialist Party, supported by Western intelligence agencies, certainly wouldn't allow a communist party to replicate its glory days at the end of World War II, and immediately launched a propaganda offensive against the French Communist Party.

As a result, in 1994, while various sectors of French society were preparing for the 1995 presidential election, both the left and right wings were embroiled in a civil war.

Chapter 150 The Free World Will Fall One After Another

By 1994, Europe was already a quagmire for the United States.

The flames of the Yugoslav civil war had just been extinguished when, last year, hundreds of thousands of Warsaw Pact troops were deployed to the Hungarian border, threatening to liberate the entire territory of Yugoslavia by force if the Security Council did not agree. The United States had no choice but to follow suit and intervene in order to stabilize the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, which now only included Serbia and Montenegro.

Mid-year, even worse news arrived: Albania announced its accession to the Warsaw Pact and became an observer state of the Yugoslav People's Federation. But the US knew all too well the root of the problem—it was American capital that orchestrated a Ponzi scheme, wiping out Albania, a country that had been an international pariah for decades and had never experienced the intricacies of capitalist financial weaponry, ultimately leading Albania to defect to the Soviet Union!

The US is here to collect money, after all. It can't keep maintaining huge investments in the Balkans without getting any benefits, can it?

After Albania joined the Warsaw Pact and became an observer state of the Yugoslav People's Federation, Serbia and Montenegro were completely surrounded by the Warsaw Pact. The billions of dollars that the United States robbed from Albania would not all go into the national bank. It was American financial groups that robbed the money, unlike the Soviet Union!

The Soviet Union didn't have such a thing as conglomerates. The so-called "enterprises" and "banks" that could compete with foreign capital in the global financial market were essentially the Soviet Communist Party's puppets. During the Great Depression of 1987 in the United States, a considerable portion of the money that the Soviet Union siphoned off was held in Soviet-affiliated foreign banks. The Soviet Communist Party could directly mobilize money in foreign banks to buy machine tools and technology from various countries. Can the US government directly mobilize money from conglomerates? Roosevelt died long ago!

Putting aside whether he can touch the financial groups, even if Gephart dares to touch the Federal Reserve's Slava, he'll have to respect him as a man of principle.

In short, the US finances did not improve in a timely manner after the robbery of Albania, because the corporations did not keep the money they robbed at home. Instead, they wanted to make the money grow by investing in factories and expanding production in other low-cost NATO allies. As for what to do at home, only heaven knows.

Meanwhile, Greece's debt crisis is nearing a tipping point, and Slovenia's economy has begun to decline after leaving Yugoslavia. The EU, which had initially wanted Slovenia to join the EU to make money, is now watching closely, fearing that Slovenia will become a new burden.

Slovenia is thus in a very awkward position.

Retreat? Neither the People's Federal Republic of Yugoslavia nor the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia wanted this traitor. Join? The EU brought it in to make money, not to bring in a creditor!

This forces the United States to continuously increase its investment in these NATO countries in Eastern Europe to stabilize their domestic situations, and the money it has just earned has to be used to stabilize its allies...

As if things weren't bad enough, the intelligence department quickly told Gephardt: More money! If they didn't, Western and Southern Europe could prepare to die!

The intelligence agencies were right, because if the CIA hadn't invested heavily in undermining the Communist Party, Italy and France would most likely have already started bringing Communists into their cabinets.

Sigrún has taught at the Iceland University of the Arts as a part-time lecturer since and was Dean of the Department of Fine Art from -. In – she held a research position at Reykjavík Art Museum focusing on the role of women in Icelandic art. She studied fine art at the Icelandic College of Arts and Crafts and at Pratt Institute, New York, and holds BA and MA degrees in art history and philosophy from the University of Iceland. Sigrún lives and works in Iceland.

The French presidential election began in 1995.

During this year, the political landscape of France was torn apart by three forces: the right wing was engaged in a civil war between Chirac and Ballard, the Socialist Party was trying to rise from the ruins of 1993, and the French Communist Party, after maintaining unity since its 28th Congress, was trying to become the largest party on the left.

The political struggles in France over the past two years have been comparable to those of the Spanish Civil War. Among these power struggles, the most intense and dirty has been the left-wing civil war between the French Communist Party and the Socialist Party.

The competition between the French Communist Party (CPLP) and the Socialist Party was a war of asymmetrical resources. Although the Socialist Party suffered a crushing defeat in the 1993 parliamentary elections, its core support base remained intact. It had cultivated its influence within the French political system for decades—local governments, trade unions, intellectuals, the media—its network of relationships was far more extensive than that of the CPLP.

More importantly, the Socialist Party has money!

The Socialist Party has more diverse funding sources than the French Communist Party, including party dues, corporate donations, and government public funding for political parties (according to French party funding laws, the Socialist Party can receive substantial public funding due to its previous vote share and number of seats).

Even at its lowest point, the Socialist Party's annual budget was several times that of the French Communist Party.

What about the French Communist Party (CCP)? The CCP's traditional sources of funding are party dues and sales of its newspaper, *L'Humanité*. These revenues have been shrinking over the past decade, with declining membership and the newspaper losing money. The CCP also has some local businesses—in towns and cities under its control, it maintains close ties with local cooperatives and small businesses.

If the French Communist Party had chosen to compromise and not withdraw from the coalition government in 1984, it might have been able to secure some corporate sponsorship. But the French Communist Party refused to compromise.

The Soviet Union did give money to the French Communist Party, but it was not as simple as "Slava wrote a check and wired it." Doing so would have given French intelligence a handle to use against them. If a country is exposed in a multi-party election for a party accepting a large amount of foreign funding, it will severely damage its image in the country.

After all, the French Communist Party has received so much money from foreign countries. If you succeed in coming to power, you will definitely have to give back to them! At that time, all the money that the officials sponsored in the election will be returned, and the people's money will be split 50/50 with the foreign countries. You are even willing to sell out the country in order to climb to the center of power. How shameful!

Therefore, Moscow's financial support could only be provided through indirect channels, such as profit sharing from trading companies, "management fees" for cultural exchange projects, and "profit rebates" from local enterprises with ties to Moscow established in towns controlled by the French Communist Party.

This amount of money adds up to a considerable sum, but it is far from enough compared to the Socialist Party's budget.

Moreover, the corrupt Socialist Party receives sponsorships from more than just domestic companies. Last year, the CIA's investment in personnel in France exceeded ten million US dollars, and that's just in personnel. With the covert support of the United States, the Socialist Party has no fear of not having money to compete.

The rich have their ways of spending money, and the poor have their own clever tricks. The French Communist Party's strategy in this election is not to compete with the Socialist Party in spending money, but to wage an asymmetric war in propaganda.

...

The French Communist Party's propaganda campaign had two lines of action. The first line was to use intelligence provided by Moscow to expose the Socialist Party's relationship with NATO intelligence agencies.

Moscow, through the KGB, provided the French Communist Party with intelligence about the Socialist Party's internal workings. This intelligence consisted mainly of records of contacts—some Socialist Party cadres had regular lunch meetings with the cultural attaché at the US Embassy in Paris; some Socialist Party think tanks had received research funding from a US foundation...

The French Communist Party processed this information into propaganda materials: "The Socialist Party is Washington's mouthpiece!" "The Socialist Party takes money from the CIA!" "Voting for the Socialist Party is voting for America!"

Some of these accusations are verifiable, some are exaggerated, and some are speculative. However, given the political climate in France, especially against the backdrop of widespread distrust of the Socialist Party among voters, these accusations have been remarkably effective.

The Socialist Party's counterattack was equally fierce: "The French Communist Party is a puppet of Moscow!" "The businesses in the towns controlled by the French Communist Party that have close ties with Moscow are evidence of Soviet interference in French internal affairs!"

The right wing also joined the attack, but its primary targets were the French Communist Party.

"The French Communist Party wants to destroy France's independence! The French Communist Party wants to turn France into a vassal state of the Soviet Union! Voting for the French Communist Party is voting for Moscow!"

The French Communist Party was caught in a pincer movement: on the left, the Socialist Party accused it of being a Soviet puppet, while on the right, the Union for the Republic accused it of betraying France.

In traditional media such as newspapers, television, and radio, the French Communist Party cannot compete with the Socialist Party. The Socialist Party has more media resources, a larger advertising budget, and more "friends" in the newsrooms of mainstream media outlets.

The French Communist Party pinned its hopes on the internet. In 1995, the internet was still a relatively new and inexpensive media space in France. Posting on the internet didn't require buying space, building a website didn't require buying television stations, and dissemination relied on the appeal of the content rather than the size of the advertising budget.

The French Communist Party (CCP) is very active online, mobilizing many young members to post, debate, and disseminate its views on various forums and discussion boards. The CCP has also built its own website, which, although rudimentary, is rich in content: the party platform, candidate introductions, exposés of corruption within the Socialist Party, the CCP's policies, and its achievements...

The French Communist Party hoped to attract more young people and intellectuals through the internet, but the US intelligence community quickly took notice of this.

In the spring of 1995, on the eve of the general election, the right-wing-controlled parliament passed a new bill: the Anti-Extremism Act.

The bill is ostensibly aimed at curbing extremism, including fascism and all extreme ideologies that threaten the democratic system of the French Republic, from spreading on the internet.

NATO also issued a statement claiming that this was "a countermeasure against the resurgence of fascism in the digital space."

However, the bill's definitions of "what constitutes extremism" are so broad that law enforcement could easily include communist propaganda if they wanted to.

The French Communist Party's website wasn't shut down outright—that would be too much in the French political climate—but its posts on some mainstream forums began to be deleted more frequently, with moderators saying it violated community rules. The rate of "delivery failed" emails sent from the French Communist Party's mailing list also increased.

Perhaps it's a technical issue?

Soviet cybersecurity agencies began providing cyber support services to the French Communist Party, and US and Soviet cybersecurity forces clashed on the French internet battlefield, during which time they also released computer viruses into each other's systems.

In short, against the backdrop of the US-Soviet rivalry, the results of the first round of the French presidential election were announced.

On March 23, 1995, the results showed that Jacques Chirac of the Republican Defense Union party received 27.8%, placing him first.

Socialist Jospin came in second place with 22% of the vote.

French Communist Party candidate Marcher received 20%, placing third;

Ballardur 16%, Le Pen 11%...

This was the French Communist Party's best result in decades. In 1981, the French Communist Party's vote share had fallen below 15%, and it was even lower in 1987, only beginning to gradually recover in 1988. Ultimately, the French Communist Party lost by a narrow margin of two percentage points.

The second round of the presidential election saw Chirac and Jospin face off – right wing versus left wing. Ultimately, Chirac defeated Jospin by 4 percentage points, and France welcomed President Chirac.

Then the election fraud scandal broke. In the days following the first round of voting, the French Communist Party accused the Socialist Party of cheating in several constituencies.

In several constituencies where the French Communist Party (CPFP) and the Socialist Party (PSP) were fiercely contested, the CPFP claimed to have discovered irregularities: at some polling stations, the number of ballots did not match the number of registered voters, with more ballots than registered voters; at others, technical malfunctions occurred during the vote counting process, causing brief interruptions to the electronic counting system, after which the numbers changed; and in some constituencies, the method of counting mail-in ballots differed from that in other constituencies...

The French Communist Party presented some evidence, such as testimonies from polling station supervisors and video footage of the vote counting process. Some of this evidence was conclusive, while the credibility of some was questionable. Given the backdrop of the Socialist Party being deeply embroiled in corruption scandals, the suicide of Beregovoi, and the blood scandal, the accusation that "the Socialist Party cheated" was extremely appealing.

Not only supporters of the French Communist Party and left-wing voters, but even many right-wing voters felt that the Socialist Party was indeed capable of doing such a thing.

The French Communist Party organized a march in which tens of thousands of people took to the streets to demand fair elections. The Socialist Party's counterattack was to divert attention by extensively exposing the French Communist Party's relationship with Moscow.

The Socialist Party's media team provided the mainstream French media with a batch of "materials": communications records between the leaders of the French Communist Party and KGB officials, allegedly leaked from the archives of the French intelligence agency; records of meetings between the leaders of the French Communist Party and the Soviet ambassador to Paris, allegedly from a surveillance report by the French counterintelligence agency; and bank records of senior French Communist Party officials, allegedly showing funds from Soviet-affiliated companies.

Much of the material inside is fabricated because Moscow didn't actually do it. However, due to the sensationalism of the mainstream media, a recording of French Communist Party leader Marchet speaking to a KGB official was released. In the recording, he said in French, "Yes, we will carry out Moscow's instructions."

The recording was later analyzed by voice verification experts who said the voiceprint did not match Marshey's public speeches perfectly. However, under the pressure of the election, no one had time to conduct voice verification during the days when the material was exposed.

Following the release of the materials, French prosecutors launched an investigation into several senior members of the French Communist Party. They were summoned for questioning, and some were briefly detained.

All of this happened in the two weeks between the first and second rounds of the election. Even though the Communist Party of France cadres were investigated and ultimately acquitted, the desired public opinion effect had already been achieved.

"The French Communist Party has improper relations with Moscow. The French Communist Party is a tool of the Soviet Union. Voting for the French Communist Party is tantamount to voting for foreign powers!"

After the first round, the French Communist Party (CCP) urged its supporters to abstain in the second round. However, many CCP supporters, after witnessing the Socialist Party's attacks on the CCP, felt more anger towards the Socialist Party than towards the right wing. Some of them chose to abstain, while others, out of a desire to punish the Socialist Party, even voted for Chirac.

On April 7, 1995, the new president completed the handover, and the French Communist Party became the largest opposition party in France. Its approval rating continued to rise, reaching 23%, approaching the level it had been at right after the end of World War II. This news made many people in Washington uneasy.

Sigrún has taught at the Iceland University of the Arts as a part-time lecturer since and was Dean of the Department of Fine Art from -. In – she held a research position at Reykjavík Art Museum focusing on the role of women in Icelandic art. She studied fine art at the Icelandic College of Arts and Crafts and at Pratt Institute, New York, and holds BA and MA degrees in art history and philosophy from the University of Iceland. Sigrún lives and works in Iceland.

Washington, D.C. Capitol Hill

A hearing was held to discuss the growing influence of communist parties within NATO member states in Western Europe and how to address it.

Intelligence officials presented several sets of data to Congress—the French Communist Party has a 22% approval rating in polls, making it the largest opposition party in France;